mersenneforum.org LLRnet server rally March 8th-9th
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2008-03-08, 23:23 #78 gd_barnes     May 2007 Kansas; USA 101000010000112 Posts The n-rate/min is virtually unchanged. I saw the temporary 600-test spike ~15-20 mins. ago where the pair I received went from n=373729 to n=374380 in a 6 min. span. Since then, I received n=374428 and n=374480 6 and 12 mins. later respectively . The n=48 and n=52 gaps in 6 mins. each is consistent with my earlier analysis of n=50 every 6 mins. This tells me that Sheep either brought his 2 LLRing machines (all that we are aware of that he has) and cached them at 300 tests or he found an extra 4 machines for a total of 6, and cached each at 100 tests. No problems. If we reach n=385K, I'll be happy...extremely so if we get to n=390K. Gary
 2008-03-09, 01:24 #79 em99010pepe     Sep 2004 2·5·283 Posts Changed my mind, added 6 cores.
2008-03-09, 03:49   #80
BlisteringSheep

Oct 2006
On a Suzuki Boulevard C90

2×3×41 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by gd_barnes The n-rate/min is virtually unchanged. I saw the temporary 600-test spike ~15-20 mins. ago where the pair I received went from n=373729 to n=374380 in a 6 min. span. Since then, I received n=374428 and n=374480 6 and 12 mins. later respectively . The n=48 and n=52 gaps in 6 mins. each is consistent with my earlier analysis of n=50 every 6 mins. This tells me that Sheep either brought his 2 LLRing machines (all that we are aware of that he has) and cached them at 300 tests or he found an extra 4 machines for a total of 6, and cached each at 100 tests. No problems. If we reach n=385K, I'll be happy...extremely so if we get to n=390K. Gary
I finally got my local proxy working & loaded it up for my octocore. I tried to get it to cache 400 WUs, but we had a fight and it won & took 600+! I've got it set now to cache 400 and return results every 200 & prune every hour. I think. That's what I set in the llr-serverconfig.txt, but it seems to pretty much just do whatever it damned well wants!

Last fiddled with by BlisteringSheep on 2008-03-09 at 03:50 Reason: re-read what the options mean :)

 2008-03-09, 04:42 #81 IronBits I ♥ BOINC!     Oct 2002 Glendale, AZ. (USA) 3·7·53 Posts I'm finding out the llrnet servers are not that robust, or cooperative, and have a mind of their own. You running it under M$or *nix ? They act differently... 2008-03-09, 04:45 #82 mdettweiler A Sunny Moo Aug 2007 USA (GMT-5) 141518 Posts Quote:  Originally Posted by IronBits I'm finding out the llrnet servers are not that robust, or cooperative, and have a mind of their own. You running it under M$ or *nix ? They act differently...
I remember reading once on the Riesel Sieve forums that besides the basic LLRnet server included with the LLRnet client (the one we're using), they had made a whole variety of different LLRnet servers, some more complex than the others. None of those alternate LLRnet servers were released publicly, but one of the admins there said that they'd be glad to give them out to anyone who asked.

2008-03-09, 04:53   #83
gd_barnes

May 2007
Kansas; USA

101000010000112 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by em99010pepe Changed my mind, added 6 cores.
Ah, that explains it. I noticed that we had jumped from ~8n/min to ~10n/min in the last few hours. We still have well more than plenty of pairs in the server to cover our needs.

With you adding your cores, we have a chance at n=385K now I think.

I'm very curious to see who takes 1st place in this rally. I brought a fair amount more firepower this time around.

Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 2008-03-09 at 05:09

2008-03-09, 05:54   #84
IronBits
I ♥ BOINC!

Oct 2002
Glendale, AZ. (USA)

45916 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Anonymous I remember reading once on the Riesel Sieve forums that besides the basic LLRnet server included with the LLRnet client (the one we're using), they had made a whole variety of different LLRnet servers, some more complex than the others. None of those alternate LLRnet servers were released publicly, but one of the admins there said that they'd be glad to give them out to anyone who asked.
Consider it asked. Can you make the connection and send them my way please?

2008-03-09, 07:57   #85
BlisteringSheep

Oct 2006
On a Suzuki Boulevard C90

2·3·41 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by IronBits I'm finding out the llrnet servers are not that robust, or cooperative, and have a mind of their own. You running it under M\$ or *nix ? They act differently...
Linux. An install of ubuntu-server-7.10 I did on a little P4 with 512megs, just so that I could have another distro to play with.

I use Slackware on the firewall, Fedora on the PS3, Solaris 8 on the UltraSPARC, WinXP on the laptop & "family" PC and Gentoo on everything else (Athlon, Xeon, PowerMac, dual-boot laptop), though I've been trying (unsuccessfully) for a week to get Kubuntu on my octo. We use mostly RHEL-AS4 at work, with a couple of YDL XServes and PowerMacs.

2008-03-09, 12:57   #86
mdettweiler
A Sunny Moo

Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)

3×2,083 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by IronBits Consider it asked. Can you make the connection and send them my way please?
Okay, will do.

 2008-03-09, 13:05 #87 mdettweiler A Sunny Moo     Aug 2007 USA (GMT-5) 3·2,083 Posts You know, I find it kind of odd that we've only had two or three primes reported from this rally so far, given the huge range that we've tested. Maybe all those primes are just sitting around "hiding" while we're waiting for users to report them to the top-5000? In other news, it looks like the rally won't have a problem making it to n=385K. How about we aim for n=390K then? Last fiddled with by mdettweiler on 2008-03-09 at 13:05 Reason: typo
2008-03-09, 17:40   #88
gd_barnes

May 2007
Kansas; USA

284316 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Anonymous You know, I find it kind of odd that we've only had two or three primes reported from this rally so far, given the huge range that we've tested. Maybe all those primes are just sitting around "hiding" while we're waiting for users to report them to the top-5000?
It's not unusual at all at 1 PM GMT when you posted this. We had 8 primes the first rally. Even if there are no 'hiding' primes waiting to be reported, we've now had 5-6 primes this rally at 5:40 PM GMT, including 2-3 confirmed primes.

The range we've processed isn't extremely huge because it's 1/6th as many k's. We're processing a higher range than in rally 1. The odds of a prime are < 1 in 5000 vs. > 1 in 4000. Also, the # of k/n pairs should be less too, even if we have have the same firewpower.

When we have a 24-hour rally around n=500K, 1-2 primes will be close to the expectation with the same firepower...much longer testing time for each pair and less chance of each being prime.

Gary

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post gd_barnes No Prime Left Behind 51 2010-05-12 22:20 mdettweiler No Prime Left Behind 66 2008-08-11 03:00 mdettweiler No Prime Left Behind 67 2008-06-23 15:32 gd_barnes No Prime Left Behind 172 2008-06-04 19:21 gd_barnes No Prime Left Behind 45 2008-05-05 19:56

All times are UTC. The time now is 11:16.

Sun Feb 28 11:16:56 UTC 2021 up 87 days, 7:28, 0 users, load averages: 1.01, 1.29, 1.25